For a long time, the discourse on stereotypes (of gender, but also on generations, cultures, etc.) has stumbled over the difficulties, not to say the virtual impossibility (at least in the short term) of changing collective mentalities. And then, research in cognitive science and social psychology has been able to shift the angle of approach : what if the real problem was not stereotypes but the way they influence our decision-making ? So, without waiting for the collective imagination to give up assigning narrow attributes to categories of the population, we can already act against decision-making biases.

 

But what exactly are " decision-making biases" ? How does it work ? How can we change the way we make decisions so that they reflect our free will rather than our submission to commonly held opinions ? How can we ensure that the liberation of decision-making biases by individuals is performative on the collective imagination?

 

 

 

In the preamble: Definitions to avoid confusion

Stereotypes and biases have a problem but do not cover exactly the same reality. Let's define!

 

Stereotypes are the set of attributes consensually (or mostly) associated with a category of population : women are talkative, multitasking, sensitive, have maternal instinct but no sense of direction, etc., men are selfish, authoritarian, obsessed with sex, have professional ambition but no sense of empathy, etc. Stereotypes deny the singularity of the individual at the same time as they imprint a portrait of society in still life, frozen by the assignment of roles and functions to one or the other.

 

Bias is a way of acting that is based on erroneous or distorted elements (including collective beliefs such as stereotypes), which leads to errors.

 

 

 

Bias :  an unfortunate scissor cut

In the language of craftsmanship and especially in trades involving cutting work (sewing, woodworking, metalwork, etc.), the word " bias " refers to an off-axis gesture, a beveling, or even an unfortunate chisel stroke that wastes time at the same time as it wastes precious material. Certainly, the history of serendipity shows us that great inventions are the result of mistakes and byways, but in the current economy of the craftsman, it is obviously not profitable to amuse himself by cutting askew the fabrics that he has to transform into clothes and the wooden planks that he has to make into furniture.

 

This reminder of what bias represents in the lexicon of craftsmanship is quite an allegory for HR or managerial functions: bias is an oblique decision that wastes resources (the most precious of all : humans) and produces closed dysfunctional systems.

 

 

 

The " violence " of bias : an invisible factor of discrimination and a fundamental diversion of free will

To approach the problem of biases, we must also go back to the etymology : bias comes from the Greek βιά which means nothing other than " violence ". Its introduction into the grammar of the fight against discrimination therefore owes nothing to chance : we are indeed in the field of invisible obstacles that cause some to stumble and/or force some more than others to take circumvention paths during their socio-professional career. This is exactly what is covered by the metaphor of the glass ceiling for women's careers or Elia Kazan's " invisible wall" to express the devious forms of ordinary anti-Semitism.  

 

Violence for the one who suffers the effects of bias, it is not a gift for the one who acts in a biased way either. Because it is most often against his (good) will that he/she exercises this violence : if we leave aside a few incorrigible sadists, no one discriminates for pleasure. This is where the power of bias lies: unconscious, it makes us act against our free will, or even against our most intimate convictions. Even if it means placing ourselves in a painful situation of cognitive dissonance, when we see sadly that the effects of our decisions turn out to be contrary to our intentions. 

 

 

 

But where does it come from that we are " biased " in our decision-making ?

But why do we make ourselves and those involved in our decisions unhappy, even though our conscience, or even our ideals, invite us to be just ?

 

We must look for answers in cognitive science research: our errors of perception, interpretation and evaluation are the result, according to the pioneer of cognitive psychology Jean-François Le Ny, of mechanisms of information processing by our cognitive system: it is from what we already know and believe that we welcome any new data .

 

Thus, says Le Ny, we begin by " selecting " what corresponds to our vision of things and discarding unconsciously, sometimes without even seeing or hearing it, what has no place in the spectrum of our anchored beliefs.

 

 

 

Stereotypes, anchored and reinforced beliefs

In the corpus of these ingrained beliefs, stereotypes hold a prominent place. For a reason that neuroscience explains very simply : from the first days of our life, our " intelligence " is built by classifying what our senses send it as information.

 

Mom takes care of me more often, I classify everything that looks like mom (women) in the " care " box. Dad speaks with a big voice and a firm tone, I classify everything that brings dad (men) together in the " authority " box .

 

Grandpa is hard of the paper, I classify everything that looks like grandpa (the old people) in the " deaf " box. My 22-year-old aunt is rebellious, I put everything that looks like aunt (young adults) in the " unruly " box. My uncle is in a wheelchair, I put everything that looks like uncle (people with disabilities) in the box of " seated for whom a parking space is reserved " (and too bad if in reality, 80% of the disability is invisible) etc.

 

Thus, stereotypes are born and anchored , incessantly reinforced by a collective culture that gives reason (or rather post-rationalizes) to these initial beliefs.

 

 

 

Fast system, slow system: our brain's formidable abilities to go from lazy comfort to curious discomfort

This explains, says social psychology researcher and associate director of the firm AlterNego Patrick Scharnitzky, why 89% of us believe that we are the subject of stereotypes and 84% admit to conveying stereotypes. It's stronger than us !

 

But all is not lost, the same Scharnitzky (editor's note : speaker in the EVE Program) reassures us, giving us access to the thinking of the Nobel Prize in Economics Daniel Kahneman and his colleague, the psychologist Amos Tsversky.

Contrary to the old idea of a " right-brain/left-brain " separation, a veritable factory for the pseudo-rationalization of gender stereotypes (the right brain is intuitive and feminine ; the left is reasonable and masculine), Kahneman and Tversky are interested in the speeds of thought.

 

We have a fast, instinctive and emotional system, which meets our need for survival (when I come across a crocodile in the jungle, I don't wonder if it's a male or a female, I cut myself with all my legs !)  but also comfort (living and dialoguing with " same " people as me comforts and comforts me) and has nothing against laziness (because going towards the unknown, towards the different represents an effort).

 

And then, we have a slow system, more logical, more introspective, more curious, which invites us to question the origin of our opinions, listens to what we had not planned to hear, is interested in what we do not know and finds stimulation in discomfort...

 

 

 

The Scharnitzky method to thwart decision-making biases

The challenge then, to make better decisions (and especially those that make the objective of inclusion effective) is to implement one's slow system every time we have to make a choice that impacts others.

 

 

To do this, Scharnitzky proposes a 10-point methodology:

 

• Have the humility to accept your stereotypes : we all have them, so we stop feeling guilty or being defensive, so that we can pacify our inner relationship with prejudices and open an intelligent discussion with others on this subject.

• Question the origin of your opinions : let's be aware of our influences and be wary of arguments from authority (just because a journalist, an expert, a statistician or a multi-graduate doctor says something, doesn't mean it covers the whole truth about a fact).

• Cultivate oneself: by constantly feeding one's " slow brain" with new knowledge, one also mutates one's " fast brain" which can " reclassify " differently what it has initially hastily put away in its stereotypal boxes.

• Doubt : just because the other person is wrong doesn't mean you're right. And vice versa.

• Maintain motivation : the slow system of the brain is confronted with discomfort, it is rewarded with stimulation... So, we must continue to bring him this satisfaction of the " challenge " so that he does not give up and does not let the neurons fall asleep!

• Beware of the first impression : " feeling " and intuitu persona have their place in apprehending a situation but cannot be a method for making decisions. Otherwise, there is a high risk of withdrawing into the inner circle, which delights the rapid system!

• Preserve your physical resources: the fast system needs comfort, so those who are tired, hungry, thirsty or have the flu greatly reduce their ability to use the slow system of their brain.

• Lighten your mental load: when you conduct a job interview, don't keep in mind at the same time that cats run out of kibble, that you forgot to pay for the canteen, that your spouse is getting you drunk and that your to-do-list is 4 pages long in A4 size 8. Stay focused and present where you are, fully available for the other person.

• Manage your emotions : welcome them of course (since in any case, they are part of life and even more so of human interactions) but don't let them put pressure on you! " Anger is a bad advisor ," says the philosopher Jean-Marc Rives, but the seduction that this or that person exerts on us is not the ally of good decisions either.

• Take your time... A good decision is not made in a hurry. It requires reflection, consideration of the pros and cons (but also of what does not fit into a binary system), possibly calling on the advice of third parties... If necessary, you have to know how to procrastinate : when you postpone until tomorrow what you could have done yesterday, it's not necessarily that you're trying to run away from the subject, it can also be that it matures in you, at your own pace.

 

 

 

The fight against decision-making biases in the face of a paradoxical injunction: act quickly and act well (and at the lowest cost, while you're at it)!

The presentation of this methodology in the field, particularly during training, has received broad approval in principle... This was closely followed by a reminder of the reality of what are the requirements addressed to the managerial body in a context of transition between a traditional culture of immediate performance and a culture to be built of sustainable performance.

 

 

You tell us to question the origin of our opinions, but in our industrial environment, it is always the last engineer who spoke who is right ; you tell us to preserve our physical resources, but we can see that presenteeism remains the best way to make oneself visible (and therefore to progress) in the company; you tell us to lighten our mental load, but it has only increased over the last 20 years (in particular because of the proliferation of digital tools that are overwhelming mailboxes and other cooperative work platforms with messages to be processed in addition to other tasks to be performed ); You tell us to procrastinate, but we are under crazy pressure to (re)act urgently in any situation !

 

 

Yes, the fight against decision-making bias comes up against a painful paradoxical injunction: making right and good decisions requires time and mental space, but the short-termism and culture of dry performance that are still in place in too many organizations compete directly with this invitation to common sense.

 

 

 

Combining the transformation of organizational cultures, the disarmament of decision-making biases... And fights against stereotypes !

The fight against decision-making bias cannot therefore be based solely on individual posture. Of course, leaders and other role models have the power (the duty ?) to set an example to set the course for those on whom they exert influence, but their action will always remain limited without a global transformation of organizational cultures.

 

It is therefore time to break with everything that hinders or obstructs the implementation of individual decision-making processes that are fairer, more precise, more conducive to creativity and innovation : to put an end once and for all to the imagery of the superhuman leader, to the culture of presenteeism, to the cramped value frames of reference (from the undisputed legitimacy of the Grande Ecole graduate to the obsession with turnover, through cost-killing  in terms of remuneration and supplier relations), with the sterile oppositions between nature and culture, body and mind, emotion and rationality or intellectualism and pragmatism...

 

This in-depth work on the culture of organizations must be supported by a persistent fight against the dissemination of stereotypes that constantly send counter-messages to individuals and organizations that would like to engage in the deployment of a culture of inclusion : the avalanche of ads that send women back to the domestic sphere and/or exalt fantasized virility (and inaccessible to normal men); the speeches that associate the old with wisdom but also with conservatism and the young with agility but also with ardour ; the imagery that attributes to Asians technological competence at the same time as curious ways of etiquette, to Orientals sensuality but also disorganization, to blacks a form of infantile gaiety at the same time as a latent aggressiveness, to fat people a lack of willpower and a deficit of self-esteem at the same time as a superior sense of conviviality , etc.

 

 

 

Make way for inclusion that respects individual singularities, gives a mandate to those who want to renounce their decision-making biases and offers everyone a richer, more open, more efficient environment also through its effects on quality of life.